Speaker of the House John Boehner departs the Capitol en route to the White House after President Barack Obama invited top lawmakers to discuss an end to the government shutdown on Oct. 2. (J. Scott Applewhite, The Associated Press)

The editors propose a question and proceed to give a superficial answer only to parrot the president’s talking points. Allow me to answer the proposed question: principle and fairness.

Principle: The Affordable Care Act was shoved down the throat of the people by an arrogant one-party rule. It’s undeniable that many flaws and unintended consequences have been discovered in it. Republicans ran against this bad law in 2010 and regained the House. Polls have shown a large percentage of Americans against it. Republicans owe it to their constituents to try to repeal or amend a bad law before it goes into effect.

Fairness: The president has made 19 changes to the law by giving exemptions, deferments and a one-year delay for businesses. In their final compromising offer, the Republicans asked that the law should not have any exclusions and everyone be treated equally. Is that fair or not?

Letter-writer Douglas Fleecs asks whether it is really the Republicans we should be mad at for the government shutdown. Yes, unquestionably. When Republicans suggest that Democrats are responsible because they would not negotiate, remember that the Democrats had already conceded the lower funding levels proposed by the Republicans in hopes of passing a clean funding resolution (one without changes to the Affordable Care Act). But a victory on funding levels was not enough for the Republicans. For whatever reason, they are convinced that making affordable health insurance available to the uninsured is so horrific that any tactic is justified in stopping it.

Even though Democrats had been warning for weeks that any modifications to the ACA contained in the funding bill would be totally unacceptable, the Republicans persistently made funding of the government dependent on ACA changes. The Republicans created this situation and should be held accountable.

Douglas Willey, Thornton

This letter was published in the Oct. 3 edition.

In assigning blame for the shutdown, some editorial letter-writers are holding the Democrats responsible because they are not willing to delay for a year the Affordable Care Act to address parts of the bill. The reason there is no delay is because there will be no work on the bill. The Republicans had four years and an election to offer their own health care plan. They didn’t. They made it clear that they saw any health care government option as a socialistic plot that would ultimately lead to communism. Fortunately, a majority of the public did not fall for such scare tactics and re-elected President Obama. Even then, the Republicans could have said, “OK, let’s look at the bill again and see what we can do to make it work better.” Instead the cry became “If we can’t get Obama, let’s get his bill!”

Renee Farrar, Lakewood

This letter was published online only.

So let me get this straight. Congress spent X amount of dollars trying to get Obamacare wiped off the face of the Earth, not once, not twice, but 42 times. Now today, one day into a government shutdown they are trying to place blame for the shutdown on President Obama because he would not negotiate on the Affordable Care Act. Might it have occurred to anyone in Congress during the past 42 attempts to repeal the law that the time for negotiation is long past? Did they really think that threatening to shut down the government and then shutting down the government was going to get them a seat at the table to negotiate?

Cheryl Vogtman, Denver

This letter was published online only.

Wonder why our country is so divided? Just listen to President Obama: “[T]he Republicans in Congress chose to shut down the federal government.” He could have just as easily said, “The Democrats chose to shut down the government,” since the Democrats rejected the Republicans’ compromise plan to fully fund the government and delay Obamacare. Alternatively, he could have been less partisan by saying that Congress caused the shutdown. If he wanted to take responsibility for leading the country, he could have said, “We could not resolve the budget issues.”

House Speaker John Boehner was wise in saying that the American people want neither a shutdown nor Obamacare, so neither should be allowed. Without true leadership in the White House, we get both.

Chris Biondolilo, Centennial

This letter was published online only.

So our very own Colorado Springs — land of the religious fundamentalist Tea Party Republican conservatives, and whose total work force is 18.8 percent federal employees — will now begin to feel the unfunded contractions resulting from the shutdown of the federal government, which was created by the some of the same wingnuts they put in office. While I feel sorry for the innocent victims of these political bullies, I refuse to feel sorry for those who voted for them. It appears that the buzzards are finally coming home to roost.

Hank Long, Aurora

This letter was published online only.

Trying to cast blame for government shutdown is divisive and not a constructive process for resolving current or future shutdowns. The House, Senate and the president have both rational and political justifications for their positions and actions. Together, they have failed to prevent the government from shutting down. We now wait as each party and institution performs in front of the media vying for political gain and to force the other side to capitulate. Let’s hold each of them equally and jointly to blame, and thereby remove politics from the discussion. Perhaps only then will they come to the table and talk to each other.

John Girolmo, Copper Mountain

This letter was published online only.

This tactic of shutting down government is not even good politics, let alone sound business practice. This kind of thing costs taxpayers money and costs a lot of working folks their livelihood. Unlike the rich, who seem to make up most of the far right now, these people need their regular income to live and pay bills.

Whoever thought up this way of “practicing politics” should have his or her income stopped for a while; then they might see how stupid and uncaring of others this practice really is.

John Ruckman, Lakewood

This letter was published online only.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

I agree with The Denver Post’s editorial urging Denver Mayor Michael Hancock to reconsider his ill-advised opposition to the proposed bag fee. Not only will there be funding provided to ease the financial burden on the poor, but does the mayor believe the poor should be exempted from reasonable environmental awareness? Reducing unnecessary waste and clutter is good for all the people, and that means all his constituents.

Barry Sharcot, Denver

This letter was published in the Oct. 3 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

A failure? Sen. Ted Cruz gave voice to millions of Americans who vehemently oppose Obamacare, to millions of Americans who are angry watching unions, corporations and even Congress refuse to abide by Obamacare as written and receive elitist exemptions from its pain. Cruz educated as he spoke, and spoke for the thousands of Americans who are losing their full-time jobs or their family’s health insurance, being thrown into the Obamacare exchanges, due to this government grab at power. Obamacare is not about your health — it’s about your money. Cruz took a principled stand against Obamacare, which is more than Sens. Michael Bennet and Mark Udall have done for their constituents.

Shreve Myers, Parker

This letter was published in the Oct. 3 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.